In a message dated 9/20/02 1:42:30 AM GMT Daylight Time,
mpkundert@students.wisc.edu writes:
> Squonk,
>
> >> Hi Matt,
>> How would Rorty define Quality?
>
> >> Is Rorty Quality?
> How about we stick to this first one, rather then your second one ;-)
>
> Um, this is a tough one. If you're trying to point out the fact that Rorty
> isn't a Pirsigian, you got me. He isn't. He probably would define
> quality. But notice, I say quality and not Quality. "q"ualities are
> simple properties of objects that even exist in MoQian terminology.
> Quality is something different. It is Reality.
>
> I'm not going to try and press this point, but I'll say this: while Rorty
> may not find much in Pirsig (which is about what he said in a short e-mail
> to 3dwavedave) that's his problem, not ours. He would, however, protect
> our individual, private right towards self-perfection, be it religion or
> philosophy or something in between. Our final vocabulary is our own; our
> route towards self-perfection is our own.
Hi Matt,
Thank you.
Openness and light shinning.
Private rights bother me.
Excellence may be conveyed by a master, and in this sense one must dissolve
the individual. If we are dominated by Quality, then private rights become a
matter of illusion?
I find Rorty can go no where near any of this?
All the best,
Squonk.
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Fri Oct 25 2002 - 16:06:34 BST